ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Impact and Effectiveness of Legislative Smoking Bans and Anti-Tobacco Media Campaigns in Reducing Smoking among Women in the US: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2024Pooled it
- Associations of Local Comprehensive Smoke-Free Ordinances With Cancer Incidence Trends in Louisiana.Preventing chronic disease · 2026Article
- Does media channel matter? exploring the disparities of online and offline anti-tobacco messages and their impacts on e-cigarette harm perception and use.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2026Article
- Empowering Women in Tobacco Control: A Participatory Study on Household Smoking Behavior in Aceh, Indonesia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of smoke-free interventions: A systematic review.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2025Review
- Disparities in Exposure to Pro-Tobacco and anti-Tobacco Advertisements in the United States.Substance use & misuse · 2025Article
- Best practices for expansion of smoke-free and aerosol-free environments in Europe: Protocol for the consultation to experts.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Lifestyle Parameters in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and in the General Adult Population-Trends over Five Years: Results of the Austrian National Health Interview Series.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature addressing the effectiveness of legislative smoking bans and anti-tobacco media campaigns in reducing smoking among women.
methodsMEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and ABI/INFORM were searched for studies published from 2005 onwards. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model and subgroup analysis on pre-selected characteristics.
resultsIn total, 652 articles were identified, and five studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The studies varied from school-based to workplace settings and had a total of 800,573 women participants, aged 12 to 64 years old. Three studies used legislative bans, one study used anti-tobacco campaigns and another one used both as their intervention. The overall pooled effect of the five studies yielded an odds ratio (OR) = 1.137 (C.I. = 0.976-1.298 and I
conclusionLegislative smoking bans were found to be associated with a reduction in the smoking rates among women compared to anti-tobacco media campaigns. Further research in this area is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.